Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Oh8ch said:Sorry, but this one fails on its face. Holbrook may be unlikable, but she is not stupid. Why would any manager who wants to make an unpopular change propose it in an employee meeting? She doesn't need band member permission for a change. This simply is not how you go about it.
Now does she want to make such a change? Perhaps, but if this report is the only evidence I am not buying it.
And whether it is true or not IS the point. Holbrook gets accused of trying to purposely wreck the University and its traditions.
She has tried to get control over an arguably out of control tail gating atmosphere after a riot or two got OSU on the natinoal news. I have heard all the arguments that drunk students were not the cause. Not the point. The point is that the person who runs the University wants a different picture painted than the one that is making the news. She takes action that she thinks will achieve that goal. That is not my definition of trying to ruin the University. It is just somebody doing their job as they see it.
As for raising tuition - don't think that is even her call. But regardless, if that reflects an ambition to destoy the school most University Presidents nationwide are out to do the same.
That a University President who takes actions that make it tough for students to get loaded on a Saturday night is unpopular is pretty predictable. That rumors should arise among those same students suggesting she does everything from torture chipmunks to worship satan is equally so.
Well done.Oh8ch said:Sorry, but this one fails on its face. Holbrook may be unlikable, but she is not stupid. Why would any manager who wants to make an unpopular change propose it in an employee meeting? She doesn't need band member permission for a change. This simply is not how you go about it.
Now does she want to make such a change? Perhaps, but if this report is the only evidence I am not buying it.
And whether it is true or not IS the point. Holbrook gets accused of trying to purposely wreck the University and its traditions.
She has tried to get control over an arguably out of control tail gating atmosphere after a riot or two got OSU on the natinoal news. I have heard all the arguments that drunk students were not the cause. Not the point. The point is that the person who runs the University wants a different picture painted than the one that is making the news. She takes action that she thinks will achieve that goal. That is not my definition of trying to ruin the University. It is just somebody doing their job as they see it.
As for raising tuition - don't think that is even her call. But regardless, if that reflects an ambition to destoy the school most University Presidents nationwide are out to do the same.
That a University President who takes actions that make it tough for students to get loaded on a Saturday night is unpopular is pretty predictable. That rumors should arise among those same students suggesting she does everything from torture chipmunks to worship satan is equally so.
No, for the time being it isn't her call. But, to ensure that a Morril Land Grant State Institution is affordable for those seeking higher education within that state is. Ohio State is here to educate her sons and daughters. When tuition is continually rising, numerous other fees are piled on students, bookstores are bleeding students for 300+ dollars a quarter, there are more unintelligible TAs than english speaking ones, the majority of faculty are 'research faculty', and as a land-grant institution we are continually 'selectively downsizing' (read: raising admission standards) then I ask myself some questions. As the president of this University, she should most definitely be looking out for the welfare of students.Oh8ch said:As for raising tuition - don't think that is even her call. But regardless, if that reflects an ambition to destoy the school most University Presidents nationwide are out to do the same.
crzykillernut said:She preaches diversity(good) yet continually raises admission standards which directly effects urban/suburban enrollment and retention (bad)?.
The purpose of a state funded University is to provide affordable education for all those who seek it. OSU is not Yale, and I balk at the thought that anyone would restrict admittance to someone because they did not grow up in a good financial or academic situation. I'm not going to turn this into a debate on the correlation of socioeconomic background to educational performance.tibor75 said:So she should dumb down the student body, so that more minorities should enter? Yeah, that makes sense.
It's laughable how many OSU students can't stand her just because she doesn't allow them to be the drunk underachievers that they are.
The day that OSU is no longer together w/ MSU as the academic jokes of the Big 10 confefence will be a great day.
Did you do med school, undergrad, both or neither at OSU?tibor75 said:The day that OSU is no longer together w/ MSU as the academic jokes of the Big 10 confefence will be a great day.
Misanthrope said:Get over the tailgating issue, already.
What you assert does not jive with the University's written policies, and a little research shows policies are in place to protect the rights of the University, the inventors and (in the case of outside sponsored research) contributions made by outside participating inventors.R0CK3TM4NN said:If you make a breakthrough discovery in Ohio State, it doesn't matter how small a part OSU had in it - it's STILL not your intellectual property. K-HO sends her legal attack dogs after you to make sure that the school gets every last drop of credit for your discovery.
Ergo, what you complain about is by rule not happening at The Ohio State University. If you find a situation being handled in a manner not consistent with OTL rules then you can go directly to them to appeal the matter. Because this deals with Patent rights your appeal can be at any time during the process of Patent Application, and through the entire life of the patent.Summary of Major Provisions
ADMINISTRATIVE SCOPE--Covers all students, faculty and other employees, and all units of the University.
SUBJECT MATTER SCOPE--Covers all intellectual property matters, e. g., inventions, works of authorship, patents, copyrights, licenses, etc., relating to sponsored programs or other research activities.
INVENTIONS--Most inventions must be reported to the Director OTL. Inventions neither directly related to the inventor's University activities or responsibilities nor involving significant use of University facilities or resources will not be claimed by the University. Others may be either claimed for development through the University or released to the inventors.
WORKS OF AUTHORSHIP--Copyright in most books, papers, artistic works, etc., will belong to their individual authors (creators), but this does not extend to material contained in such works to which the University has independent rights (such as a computer program included as an appendix) nor to works produced as an integral part of a sponsored program or other specific responsibility.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE PREPARED BY A MEMBER OF THE INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF FOR INSTRUCTIONAL USE--The rights of University ownership of instructional software where the University has supported development of the software is dependent on prior written agreement between the author(s) and the university.
STUDENT INVENTIONS AND WORKS OF AUTHORSHIP--Exempt unless produced in capacity as employee, as part of a sponsored program or in certain other special circumstances.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE--Patenting, copyright protection, licensing and distribution of software is a complex and changing area; questions about this are best referred to the Director OTL.
ROYALTY SHARING--Except for on-the-job works of authorship (including computer software) of non-faculty employees, the inventors' or creators' share of royalties received by the University (including the Research Foundation) for their inventions, etc., is as follows: For gross royalties that are up to $75,000 the individual(s) receive one half of gross. Anything beyond $75,000 one third of {gross in excess of $75,000 minus any expenses in excess of $37,500}. For example: for $200,000 cumulative gross royalties, with $42,500 cumulative expenses, the cumulative share for all individuals would be: 1/2 x 75,000 + 1/3 x [(200,000 - 75,000) - (42,500 - 37,500)] = $77,500
I don't know why I even care to defend this, but oh well.tibor75 said:The day that OSU is no longer together w/ MSU as the academic jokes of the Big 10 confefence will be a great day.